Loading summary
Transcript70 lines
- [00:02]
Kayla Brantley
Seriously popular.
- [00:04]
David Gelman
The following episode explores a number of allegations regarding the artist Diddy. He denies all charges and has pled not guilty to sex trafficking, racketeering and transportation to engage in prostitution. The biggest secret in the entertainment industry.
- [00:20]
Kayla Brantley
That really wasn't a secret at all has finally been revealed to the world.
- [00:26]
Marjorie Hernandez
At the height of his career, Sean Diddy Combs had it all. It seemed like everything Diddy touched turned to gold. Now the once untouchable hip hop mogul is fighting for his life as he faces multiple federal charges in New York including sex trafficking and allegedly running a criminal enterprise.
- [00:46]
Kayla Brantley
Music mogul and rapper Sean Diddy Combs has faced four different lawsuits in recent weeks alleging sexual assault.
- [00:52]
David Gelman
Combs can be seen grabbing Ventura and.
- [00:55]
Kayla Brantley
Throwing her to the ground.
- [00:56]
David Gelman
Oh, this guy is dangerous.
- [00:58]
Marjorie Hernandez
Woman has now come forward.
- [01:00]
David Gelman
A legend comes of sexual assault. She was drugged and sexually assaulted by Combs.
- [01:05]
Marjorie Hernandez
I'm DailyMail.com journalist Marjorie Hernandez and over the last six months I've been investigating this incredible story and speaking to the people in the eye of the storm. Welcome to the trial of Diddy.
- [01:24]
Kayla Brantley
Hey, I'm Kayla Brantley, reporter at large for the Daily Mail in Manhattan. And welcome to episode 11 of the Trial of Diddy. My co host Marjorie is off this week, so it's me just doing double duty. And it's been a busy few days for Diddy this week with an appearance in court on Tuesday and there will be a ruling on his latest bail plea on Friday the 22nd. So let's dig into what's been going on this week. Tuesday in court, prosecutors alleged that Diddy had been breaking prison rules by contacting potential witnesses. It's claimed that Diddy had made, quote, relentless efforts to corruptly influence witness testimony by using other inmates phones and making three way calls to serve speak to people who are not on his approved contacts list. In a court filing, prosecutors claimed a review of recorded calls also found that Diddy had encouraged his own family to contact potential witnesses in his case. Diddy has like always pleaded not guilty to all of these charges and denies any wrongdoing. So there's been a lot going on. And at Tuesday's hearing, the judge overseeing the case, his name is Aaron Sabramanian, he ordered that prosecutors destroy copies of material seized in Combs jail cell as a judge decided whether they could used in court. So now Diddy's defense team are claiming that government prosecutors illegally seized these personal notes during a search of his cell at the Metropolitan Detention center in Brooklyn. His team argued that some of the detailed Information in the material is protected under attorney client privilege, which shields information discussed between a client and their attorney. Diddy's lawyer, Alexandra Shapiro, argued that it was impossible for her client to prepare for trial from his cell because of the, quote, incredibly voluminous amount of material to especially without a laptop. So Shapiro said that detention is denying Combs of any real opportunity to be ready for trial, which is something that violates his rights under the US Constitution. Now, in response, prosecutors again are arguing that Diddy should be denied bail. They allege that he, quote, poses serious risks of danger and obstruction of these proceedings. Now, Diddy is accused of using social media posts to influence any potential jury pool at his trial. Prosecutors further alleged that there was a strong inference that Combs paid a witness after she posted her support statement online. Prosecutors characterized Combs as running a, quote, relentless scheme to contact potential witnesses, including victims of his abuse, who could provide powerful testimony against him. And we all saw Combs children post a video of themselves singing Happy Birthday to their father while on the phone. And according to the filing, Diddy then monitored the analytics of the post's engagement and quote, explicitly discussed with his family how to ensure that the video had his desired effect on potential jury members. Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times has reported that a, quote, mystery LA celebrity says a lawyer for accusers of Sean Combs tried to extort a payout. A Los Angeles based celebrity who's keeping his identity secret is suing Tony Busby, the lawyer representing 120 alleged victims of Diddy. The man says that the lawyer tried to extort a payout in return for not identifying him as a sexual abuser linked to Diddy. Journalist Richard Winton writes that a celebrity referred to in the lawsuit as a, quote, high profile individual and identified only as John Doe through his lawyers says Houston based Busby wrote demand letters in which he made, quote, wildly false, horrific allegations. Busby said the individual raped minors at a Combs party and that unless he agrees to a mediated settlement, there would be consequences, according to the lawsuit. Now, attorneys for the celebrity said Busby threatened to, quote, unleash entirely fabricated and malicious allegations of sexual assault, adding, this is textbook extortion. Busby hit back, saying that he and his firm would, quote, not allow the powerful and their high dollar lawyers to intimidate or silence sexual survivors. He goes on saying, I'm a U.S. marine. I won't be silenced or intimidated. Neither will my clients. And Busby wrote that on his own personal Instagram. So Winton goes on to explain how Busby has previously vowed to name celebrities who he says were involved in the alleged sexual abuse. During a news conference in September, Busby claimed that the names contained in the suits would, quote, shock Combs. Attorneys denied Busby's allegations. They say Mr. Combs has never sexually assaulted anyone, adult or minor, man or woman. Diddy's attorneys are even asking the judge if he could appear in court without the customary shackles because they claim it would, quote, prejudice the jury. And this is something that I'm very excited to ask our next guest about, and I wonder what he thinks. And today I have with me former federal prosecutor and defense attorney David Gelman, whose practice areas include criminal defense, drug charges, sex crimes, and weapons charges. So, David, you're kind of the perfect person to talk about this with.
- [06:19]
David Gelman
Good. I'm glad.
- [06:20]
Kayla Brantley
And I know you've been following the case, so I just kind of want to talk first about some of the latest updates. So one huge thing we had this week was news that there was a raid on Diddy's jail cell, and his jail cell was searched. His personal notebooks were seized. And his defense is saying that this is completely violating attorney client privilege. What do you make of this?
- [06:45]
David Gelman
They're right. It is. And the judge agreed with them because there were handwritten notes from Diddy that were confiscated during the raid. And the judge specifically told the federal prosecutors, you better destroy them immediately. So that is attorney client privilege, you know, to have a raid on a individual that's currently incarcerated. It's very rare. Does not. I mean, yeah, it doesn't happen often. So for them to do this, they really must have thought that there's some extraordinary activity going on for. With Diddy and maybe, you know, outside influences, if you will, and that's why they did this. But even if that's, you know, 100 accurate, you still cannot take notes or. Or. Or documentation from the inmate where it's, you know, correspondence between him and his attorneys, or in the alternative, you know, his. His plain notes where he's just preparing for trial, which is, again, that's confidential. That's only for him. So that was a big no. No.
- [07:57]
Kayla Brantley
Well, what are some things that would prompt a raid of a jail cell?
- [08:02]
David Gelman
A couple things. So reading the. The. The motion from the government, it is that, you know, Diddy is using not only outside influences like family and friends to get in contact with individuals who could testify against him and try to pay them off, but he's using individuals inside of the prison to actually do the same thing. So he's using specific messaging apps from not him, but from other inmates cell phones or electronic devices. And he's also using other inmates phone numbers because everybody has their own set of phone number in the federal prison. So in detention center, I should say. So he's using those numbers and those apps to contact people who again, are going to testify against them. Potentially that's called witness tampering. You're not allowed to do that. And I guess it really just got to a point where it's almost become public. I mean, individuals have stated, Ray J. Stated, I believe that, you know, these individuals are being contacted, and when that happens, the government, they're going to come down on you and they're going to come down on you hard. And Diddy found that out firsthand.
- [09:17]
Kayla Brantley
And there's something that I actually don't really, I'm not very knowledgeable on. This is a filter team. So regarding the notes that were seized from Diddy's cell, the prosecution said they found the following items. So, one was a manila folder marked legal, a notebook, an address book, and other, quote, personal effects. Now, a prosecutor said that a photographer took photos of the notebook and address book, and then an investigator submitted the items to a filter team. Can you explain. Explain what that filter team does?
- [09:47]
David Gelman
Yeah. So a filter team pretty much redacts information, private information that the prosecutors are not allowed to have. It's not allowed to be public or anything like that, because you got to remember all these motions and are public knowledge, if you think about it. So, you know, there could be Social Security numbers on there or just private information in general. And so a filter team, it's. It's actually pretty common when it comes to the federal government where they get a plethora of evidence. And I'm talking about like boxes and boxes and boxes, all right. And not in this particular instance, but you have to have a whole team really go through it and make sure what can and cannot be used or seen for that matter. And so that's what they do. They're pretty. They're common. They're very common. And. But I get this particular raid on an inmate in a federal facility. That is not common.
- [10:42]
Kayla Brantley
Well, you said that this was a big no no by the prosecution. So could there be a possibility now that Diddy's legal team could file a motion to remove the prosecution from the case?
- [10:54]
David Gelman
They could try. Yes, definitely could. However, I don't think they will be successful in doing so because I don't understand the underlying reason why they asked for the raid and got the raid approved by the doj. Is because of improper messaging and improper communications with potential witnesses. So that's the underlying thing. And that doesn't seem to be not or that hasn't been not proven yet, if you will. I think they're still having that. They still to find out if that's accurate or not, and the judge has to make that determination. But just because they took a couple different things that are turning client privilege, that's being destroyed. So kind of no harm, no foul, if you will. I don't think they're going to be very successful in trying to get the, the federal prosecutors off of this case.
- [11:42]
Kayla Brantley
You did mention the alleged witness tampering.
- [11:46]
David Gelman
It's all allegations, all out.
- [11:48]
Kayla Brantley
It's all allegations. Make sure we throw in the word alleged and alleged obstruction. Could, if Diddy is found that he did obstruct justice, if he was witness tampering, could he now face a harsher punishment?
- [12:04]
David Gelman
Well, he could, but he's also going to face additional charges if that happens, because the federal government is then going to just hit him with a slew of charges for witness tampering and maybe other co defendants as well, or not co defendants, but other individuals who are acting at his on his behalf. You know, I've read that his sons have been contacting individuals they could then be subject to, to federal crimes of witness tampering. Other associates associated with Diddy and his family also could be, you know, subject to that. So I, I think it would definitely, you know, hurt Diddy if this did come out. Furthermore, you know, Diddy's been trying to get out for a while, trying to get bail. And if you're contacting witnesses in jail or having other people do it at your behest, a judge is never going to let you out of jail. So either way, it doesn't look good.
- [13:01]
Kayla Brantley
Yeah. And speaking of Diddy trying to get out of jail, how many times can his team, you know, make a bid to get him out of jail before a judge is like, this is too much. You've asked enough. I've said no enough times. Is there a limit?
- [13:16]
David Gelman
There really isn't. Although, you know, if they're reading the tea leaves, which, you know, his attorneys are very, very good. From what I, from what I gather, they're going to probably tell Diddy, you know, all right, enough. We, we lost. All right? We're not doing it. There has to be a change of circumstance for them to really get. Have another shot at the apple, if you will. And at this particular time, I think they've had what, two or three motions already. That, and I think this third one right now is still being considered by the judge, but there's not a change of circumstance. All they're doing is saying, all right, Judge, look, we will make even more restrictions for Diddy. We'll put up X amount of dollars, $50 million. He can only go to his residence in New York City or Miami. And once he's there, he has to stay there. He can't have anybody there. He can't make any phone calls except to his legal team. He can't go on the Internet, can't do X, y, Z. So they're trying to put more conditions on there. The problem is, where is a change in circumstances? And there isn't any. There's nothing that's changed from the. From the previous position. The only thing that's changed right now is that there's allegations that Diddy and his team are contacting individuals. That's not going to bode well for him.
- [14:31]
Kayla Brantley
Yeah. And you mentioned Diddy's family, and I don't know if you saw the Instagram post for his birthday. It was a video of his children on the phone with him. Diddy was on speaker. They sing him Happy birthday. Now the prosecution is alleging what looked like a very innocent family moment was actually a ploy to influence potential witnesses or influence potential jury members. And what do you make of that now that it seems that his family could potentially be getting involved?
- [15:03]
David Gelman
You know, I think that's a little. That's going a little too far for the prosecutors, in my opinion. You know, is it true that they did that to potentially influence jurors? Maybe. Who knows? But I don't buy it. You know, this is. And a judge certainly isn't going to buy it. You know, how. How are they possibly going to prove that was their intent? They're not. They will never be able to do so now, you know, did they do that for that reason? No. I mean, I wouldn't put it past them.
- [15:35]
Kayla Brantley
But they allege. They allege that Diddy was looking at the social media analytics and kind of seeing how that, you know, was maybe received. Again, it seems like it's very difficult to prove.
- [15:47]
David Gelman
Yeah. The government, they're trying to stack everything they possibly can, any scintilla of evidence of interference for witnesses. They're going to use it. And some of it is probably going to hold up, some of it won't. I doubt this is going to be one of those things that holds up.
- [16:05]
Kayla Brantley
Right. And I think that this is also something important to remind Our listeners, that not everything you may read about this case is automatically true. You know, make your own opinions on it, read all the facts.
- [16:18]
David Gelman
Yep.
- [16:18]
Kayla Brantley
A lot of the stuff that is coming out, you know, is from the prosecution side that is trying to find him guilty and that everything coming from Diddy's side is trying to find him innocent. So take with that what you will.
- [16:29]
David Gelman
Yeah, Kayla, I mean, you hit the nail on the head right there. Don't believe everything you read. All right? I'm sure there's probably some truths, you know, here and there, but there's a lot of gray area, and, you know, that's what's going to be coming out, you know, probably in the not too distant future.
- [16:44]
Kayla Brantley
And that's why we have this podcast, so we can break it down and you can make your decisions or your opinions for yourself. Diddy's attorneys, recently, this also came up this week, asked the judge if he could appear unshackled for all his future court dates because they claim it would prejudice the jury. Like, you and I know that all US Federal courts, you know, TV and phone cameras are not allowed, so there's no real visual representation of this other than, I guess, you know, a court sketch. But the attorneys said that several news outlets have reported on him being shackled and that it would sway the jury one way or another. What are your thoughts on this?
- [17:35]
David Gelman
I. I don't think it's going to do much, honestly. They're grasping at straws here. They're doing anything they possibly can. And look, a lot of this, I have a feeling, is coming from Diddy himself. You know, look, when you have a client who is very well known, you know, very powerful, has a lot of money like Diddy, who's, you know, used to getting his way, you're going to make your will known, and you're going to. And it has to be through your attorneys. I've had to deal with it a lot where I've had clients who, you know, tell me specifically, hey, I want you to ask this judge this. I'm going to let them know. Look, the judge is going to tell you no right off the bat, but if you want me to do it, sure. You know, what's the worst they're going to say? I have a feeling that's exactly what's happening here. Did he just. Probably just telling his attorneys, I don't want to come out in shackles. I don't like how it looks. Well, no kidding. Nobody's gonna like out looks being in shackles. But the public is not going to see that because like you said, there's no cameras, there's no pictures here. It's only a court stenographer. So I, you know, I don't think it's a lot. A lot going on there, if you will.
- [18:39]
Kayla Brantley
Yeah. It reminds me of several other high profile, very successful people on trial whom I shall not name that, you know, cared about their image and cared were perceived from even the court sketches and how it was reported. So I, I think you make a great point there. But do you think the judge would rule to not have him shackled?
- [18:59]
David Gelman
No, no, not in this lifetime, no. He looks at Diddy just like any other defendant that comes before him. You know, did. He has a lot more money than everybody else, but the judge doesn't really care and doesn't that won't see it like that. I guarantee you he will not grant that request.
- [19:17]
Kayla Brantley
Okay. Well, this is something that has been going on for weeks, that Diddy's alleged victims and the various civil lawsuits that they've been Jane and John Doe and that Diddy's team had argued that they can't really fight these allegations if they don't know who these people are and have really fought to reveal their identity. How can Diddy's legal team prepare if they don't know these people? Do they make a deal? Big, decent point.
- [19:45]
David Gelman
I think, Gayle, you're right. You have to. You have to be able to know who your accuser is. And by saying Jane or John Doe, that doesn't really do you any good. They're going to know eventually because they're literally. They're going to have to be prepared and presented these facts. I think they make an excellent point. However, the judge is going to balance everything, you know, the balance the privacy of these alleged victims against the needs of the defense. And it's a str. It's a tough balancing act. I don't. I don't want to be the judge when it comes to this, but they're going to have to. The judge is going to order the names to be released. Now, I have a feeling what the judge will do would be that they have to be released, but it can only be to the defense. And it's only. It's going to be a very secretive way, if you will. Diddy may not. Well, Diddy's going to have to know about it. The problem is, obviously with these allegations with Diddy right now, and I don't know, again, who knows if they're found, they're true or not. But how are they going to be protected, these witnesses?
- [20:51]
Kayla Brantley
Yeah, that was my next question. Yeah.
- [20:53]
David Gelman
And that's going to be the key here. And it's going to be difficult to find out. I, I don't know. But the defense has to know and they are entitled to know. And it's by court rule. They have, they, they need to know. So they're going to know sooner rather than later. But the judge is going to probably put her on a very, very tight leash.
- [21:13]
Kayla Brantley
Yeah. I mean a lot of these alleged victims come out because they feel that they can, you know, hide behind the guise of a Jane Doe, a John Doe. So do you think that they would have known that eventually their name would come out?
- [21:29]
David Gelman
If they didn't know, then we may have a problem.
- [21:32]
Kayla Brantley
Okay.
- [21:32]
David Gelman
Because that you, you can't hide behind the nate for so long. I understand the beginning and you know, look, maybe they thought that this is something that would just settle. But when you are dealing with the, the federal government, you're dealing with criminal charges, you have to be prepared that your name is going to eventually get released.
- [21:56]
Kayla Brantley
And that's released to Diddy's team. That's not necessarily released to the general public.
- [22:02]
David Gelman
Correct? Correct. So yes, release the Diddy's team. But look, once it gets released, I don't care if it is a Diddy's team or not. And they could be under strict orders that it can't be really, you know, revealed to anybody else. You know, we know how the world works and individuals identities do get leaked. And I wouldn't be surprised even if it's not by on purpose. But it could happen.
- [22:27]
Kayla Brantley
Yeah. And you bring up a point from a few episodes back when Diddy's team was accusing the prosecution of leaking things to the media.
- [22:39]
David Gelman
It's a two way street. It really is. The prosecutors do it, the defense attorneys do it.
- [22:44]
Kayla Brantley
So they have denied it, by the way.
- [22:46]
David Gelman
Everybody denies it. Of course they're going to deny it if you don't deny it. You know, we got, we got some issues here.
- [22:52]
Kayla Brantley
Yes. Just had to say it.
- [22:53]
David Gelman
Yeah, yeah. But no, it's part of the game. All right? Everybody has to play the game. Everybody. And they're smart attorneys on both sides. So I could see, I could see some leaks happening.
- [23:05]
Kayla Brantley
And what are the prosecutors required to reveal to Diddy's legal team while they're continuing their investigation?
- [23:12]
David Gelman
Well, it's interesting. They don't have to reveal anything unless the individuals are indicted. All right, so if they're, or, or they're going to be called as witnesses. They don't have to bring anything up, but once they know that they're going to be calling, you know, certain witnesses and whatnot, they have to provide the names. They have to provide all the information, what they're going to testify or proffer, if you will. They're also going to have to name any other individuals who potentially had a deal. So. Because right now, the indictment only has Diddy. Now, did anybody else cooperate and maybe get a better deal and they just were never indicted. Possible. And if that's the case, we're going to have to. They're going to have to advise the defense sooner rather than later.
- [24:00]
Kayla Brantley
This is a huge case, and the allegations spanned decades. With all the investigation that needs to happen, a date has been set for May 5, 2025. Do you think that we'll actually see a trial happen May 5, or is it likely that this will just get pushed back?
- [24:22]
David Gelman
If it doesn't get pushed back, I'd be astounded. I'll bet money right now that it does not happen in May. I know Diddy and his legal team are saying, we wanted it. We, you know, we want as soon as possible. We want it as soon as possible. There is no way in blue hell that they can possibly be prepared for that date. I understand what. We're November, so we still have like five months, six months. But there's so much information that they have to go through, the defense has to go through, and they're still getting information every day. I, I cannot possibly see them being able to be trial ready on May 5th. So I, I don't see it happening. I would. And, you know, mark this right down. What Today is November, November 20th at 1:35pm Mark it down. That David Gelman said is not going to happen. You're going to have a ton of motions that still need to be filed by both parties. All right, so there's going to be suppression motions, there's going to be different motions regarding probably venue witnesses, everything like that. So that all has to be hammered out. And after that is all fleshed out, then they're going to have to go through what is going to be admissible, what is not going to be admissible. That is going to take forever. Furthermore, you're going to have a ton of witnesses that you have to prep for, and we still don't know how many witnesses are actually going to be having to testify against Diddy. And they still have to provide the names. So once that happens, the defense has to get their ducks in a Row they have to get all the information, all their due diligence on these potential witnesses and then finally you have to prep. Did he. And that's the biggest thing now. Will he have to, will he testify at his own trial or not? That's obviously going to be a game time decision. I, you know, I never think it's a good idea to have your own client testify if you don't have to, but you know that that's something that they're going to have to deal with. So there's so much, there's so much unknown right now, so much information that still is unavailable and both for prosecutors and the defense that I just think it's, it's not very realistic. I mean, federal trials, they, they don't happen for years. And you know, Diddy was just charged in what, September or something like that. So, you know, this is incredibly quick. If that did happen in May.
- [26:48]
Kayla Brantley
Yeah, I think a lot of people were shocked that the judge even agreed to set a trial date for May.
- [26:55]
David Gelman
I think that what happened was that they did that just to put it on the calendar. But I think all parties know that it's unrealistic that it's going to happen.
- [27:03]
Kayla Brantley
Would his team be doing themselves a disservice by pushing it that fast? Like, I know they're the ones who said that they want this as quick as possible. Is that just because they want him, you know, out of prison? What would the reasoning behind that be?
- [27:17]
David Gelman
I, I think it's posturing, you know, there you're gonna have to say it, that, hey, we want to, we want to get to a trial as soon as possible. We want to show, we want our, our client to be proven innocent. And I'm sure Diddy wants to have this happen immediately too. I mean, I, if I was him, I certainly would. I don't want to be in this, this hell hole that's the Federal Detention Center. So I, I'm sure they want it to happen, but practically speaking, they know it can't happen. And I'm sure they've told Diddy this before, you know, so I think a lot of this is media based, if you will.
- [27:52]
Kayla Brantley
The LA Times reported that an LA based celebrity who's keeping his identity a secret, he's a John Doe, is suing Tony Busby, who's The lawyer representing 120 alleged victims of Diddy. So the man says that the lawyer tried to extort a payout in return for not identifying him as a sexual abuser who's linked to Diddy. The Attorneys for that celebrity said that Busby threatened to unleash entirely fabricated malicious allegations, and it's textbook extortion. Meanwhile, Busby saying, you know, he's not going to allow the powerful people to intimidate him and silence his sexual survivors. So this is a very interesting case of a lawyer who's now representing these alleged victims now being accused. I don't know what you make of this as a lawyer yourself.
- [28:49]
David Gelman
It's very interesting because. And I. And look, I don't know Tony Busby personally, but I know that he represents a lot of victims or alleged victims. He represented a lot of the individuals in DeShawn Watson's civil cases. So it's a very precarious situation that an individual is in because you're trying to advocate for your client. And in his situation, he's advocating for alleged victims who have been sexually assaulted, allegedly. Again, I, you know, who knows what's going on or not? But they're all allegations. And if I was him, he, you know, contacts the other part, other party or their attorneys, I would do the same thing to see maybe you can get a settlement before you have to really get messy, if you will. And a lot of people want to do that, especially celebrities, because the less their name is in the papers and in the Internet for, you know, salacious acts, obviously it's better for them. They want to try to avoid this as much as possible.
- [29:49]
Kayla Brantley
So you bring up a great point. So what's like the fine line between a settlement and extortion?
- [29:55]
David Gelman
There isn't one there. It's like an invisible line, really. And, you know, you may cross it, you may not. And, you know, just because somebody thinks it's extortion, that doesn't necessarily, you know, mean it is extortion. If. If it's true, it's not extortion. So it's a very, very tricky situation that. That Busby is. Is in. I can understand the other side and what they're saying, but at the same time, if these allegations are true, you know, and, you know, Busby's just trying to protect his client and advocate for the client. I don't know how much that really is extortion, even though another side may disagree.
- [30:38]
Kayla Brantley
Well, David, you know your stuff. Thank you so much for joining us.
- [30:43]
David Gelman
Thank you very much for having me. Kayla, it's been great talking with you.
- [30:46]
Kayla Brantley
We had a great response to our Q and A episode last week, and it was a lot of fun to look at all. All your questions. So please do check that out. If you haven't heard it already, and we'll dig into some more of those comments and questions very soon. In the meantime, what would you like us to cover? What other trials are you interested in? Let us know by email@thetrialailymail.com or you can WhatsApp us on +4477966, 57512. Start your message with Trial Foreign as ever. Thank you for listening. Please share all your comments, suggestions and thoughts on the Trial of Diddy on Apple or Spotify and follow us on TikTok@DailyMailCrime. Do follow the Trial of Diddy as we will be here each week with new information and expert guests. Goodbye.